was at dealers with son in law and daughter today (they ordered a new rapid spaceback) and sat in the fabia 3 (both hatch and estate)

 

first impressions were not good, I felt there was less room than my GLII, i.e. I seemed to be closer to the windscreen and not as much leg room in front as even with seat right back I could only just get reasonable comfortable very similar to the issues I have with the rapid

 

value for money ?  it depends what you compare it to

 

for me, I would probably have settled on an octavia S 1.2 TSi

 

for me as with the rapid they have compromised front and rear leg room for a bigger boot

 

an interesting comment for those wanting a hot version

 

salesman said VRs is coming due to demand an will be a 1.4 TDi 160 - 180PS, just can't help but think mk2 reliability issue de ja vue

+1 on the legroom. Definitely a major step backwards compared to the mk2.

They may as well get on with it and release a vRS. Doesn't seem like many people are ordering the shopping-trolley versions.......

was at dealers with son in law and daughter today (they ordered a new rapid spaceback) and sat in the fabia 3 (both hatch and estate)

first impressions were not good, I felt there was less room than my GLII, i.e. I seemed to be closer to the windscreen and not as much leg room in front as even with seat right back I could only just get reasonable comfortable very similar to the issues I have with the rapid

value for money ? it depends what you compare it to

for me, I would probably have settled on an octavia S 1.2 TSi

for me as with the rapid they have compromised front and rear leg room for a bigger boot

an interesting comment for those wanting a hot version

salesman said VRs is coming due to demand an will be a 1.4 TDi 160 - 180PS, just can't help but think mk2 reliability issue de ja vue

Oooh! 160ps derv that'll do nicely - where do I sign?

Edited 7 March, 201511 yr by Kenny.j

One thing I did notice on the Fabia MKIII SE-L Hatch I looked at was the size and shape of the interior mirror.  weird or what

was fun though, parked my new 15 reg Hyundai i20 I only picked up a few hours earlier on the skoda forecourt as was in dealers with daughter / son in law

 

our salesman actually had a positive view of the car, and seemed shocked when I told only £13500 for something with comparable speck to an SE L

 

he did get a spaceback order from son in law though, and we had quite a good chat as I have known him several years and we have been in and out often and bought 6 cars over 3 years between me, swmbo, daughter and son in law

Edited 7 March, 201511 yr by bluecar1

I didn't think legroom was that bad.. nor did I think the rear view mirror was such problem.. it's just a mirror!  I don't see what they hype surrounding a vRS is really.. I mean, the only time in ernest you'll get to drive it properly, is open country road or the motorway at 3:00am.. any other time and you'll be stuck in traffic and won't hardly see beyond 50mph on the speedo.. As for the i20 the engine is inferior in terms of grunt to the Fabia which has been mentioned elsewhere.. it may be cheaper, but not by much.  Each to their own and all that.. but there's a lot of negativity to the Mk3.. it's like people are expecting a bloody Porsche performance car with every single feature known to man thrown on it for £10000 and 0%apr and no deposit - it ain't going to happen people!

I didn't think legroom was that bad.. nor did I think the rear view mirror was such problem.. it's just a mirror!  I don't see what they hype surrounding a vRS is really.. I mean, the only time in ernest you'll get to drive it properly, is open country road or the motorway at 3:00am.. any other time and you'll be stuck in traffic and won't hardly see beyond 50mph on the speedo.. As for the i20 the engine is inferior in terms of grunt to the Fabia which has been mentioned elsewhere.. it may be cheaper, but not by much.  Each to their own and all that.. but there's a lot of negativity to the Mk3.. it's like people are expecting a bloody Porsche performance car with every single feature known to man thrown on it for £10000 and 0%apr and no deposit - it ain't going to happen people!

 

 

Remember when lurking here 7 or 8 years ago - all the negative comments on the new tall and clumsy MKII Fabia.

The FABs seems to ages Gracefully

was at dealers with son in law and daughter today (they ordered a new rapid spaceback) and sat in the fabia 3 (both hatch and estate)

 

first impressions were not good, I felt there was less room than my GLII, i.e. I seemed to be closer to the windscreen and not as much leg room in front as even with seat right back I could only just get reasonable comfortable very similar to the issues I have with the rapid

 

value for money ?  it depends what you compare it to

 

for me, I would probably have settled on an octavia S 1.2 TSi

 

for me as with the rapid they have compromised front and rear leg room for a bigger boot

 

an interesting comment for those wanting a hot version

 

salesman said VRs is coming due to demand an will be a 1.4 TDi 160 - 180PS, just can't help but think mk2 reliability issue de ja vue

Obviously the Rapid wheelbase is about 10 cm longer than the Fabia wheelbase. Guess you can feel that inside the cabin.

Fabia is supposed to be a small car and the Rapid something inbetween to the Octavia.

Personally I had the feeling of sitting in a much older designed car when testing the Rapid, which isnt surprising as thats the way it is.

My long 35"inseam legs hadnt any problems finding room in the Fabia, but as were all different its a fortune Skoda are building different cars for satisfying one and each of us.

My children are grown ups since many years so the backseat will only be of any use for the Jack Russel and occasionally for a third passenger, meaning legroom in the back is a minor problem to me.

Test driven the new Fabia III and likewise felt there was less room in the back than our current Monte.

 

However we find our Spaceback to be quite aptly named, as there seems to be plenty for passengers and luggage, plus the drivers ergonomics are far superior to the previous Octy III, which for me anyway developed into the most uncomfortable car I've owned in over 30 years of driving; foot pedal, seat and steering alignment are terrible and not helped by an unsupportive seat, with base side bolsters made of something akin to concrete.

 

 

TP

was fun though, parked my new 15 reg Hyundai i20 I only picked up a few hours earlier on the skoda forecourt as was in dealers with daughter / son in law

 

our salesman actually had a positive view of the car, and seemed shocked when I told only £13500 for something with comparable speck to an SE L

 

he did get a spaceback order from son in law though, and we had quite a good chat as I have known him several years and we have been in and out often and bought 6 cars over 3 years between me, swmbo, daughter and son in law

I to like the i20 and until recently (when in the dealers ordering a new i10 premium se) it was high on my list as my next purchase..... until i found out it was the old enginest and worse of all i want an auto for my next car but don't want to pay a fortune in tax due to co2 and don't want to suffer too much in terms of fuel economy, the auto box on the i20 is the tried and te one which does costs more in tax and is awful on fuel, so the DSG is for me.... so the Hyundai is out. When pointing this out to the Hyundai salesman (Remember at this point we had ordered one top of the range i10 with every extra and will be ordering another in a month or so) he said he did not know of the DSG boxes but the 4 speed auto box on the Hyundai was the best there is !!!! How i chuckled.

I to like the i20 and until recently (when in the dealers ordering a new i10 premium se) it was high on my list as my next purchase..... until i found out it was the old enginest and worse of all i want an auto for my next car but don't want to pay a fortune in tax due to co2 and don't want to suffer too much in terms of fuel economy, the auto box on the i20 is the tried and te one which does costs more in tax and is awful on fuel, so the DSG is for me.... so the Hyundai is out. When pointing this out to the Hyundai salesman (Remember at this point we had ordered one top of the range i10 with every extra and will be ordering another in a month or so) he said he did not know of the DSG boxes but the 4 speed auto box on the Hyundai was the best there is !!!! How i chuckled.

yep, the only sensible engine choice on the i20 is either the diesel or 1.2 petrol

 

the 1.4 petrol is obviously old school tech looking at the emmissions

 

but there will be a 120PS 1.0 turbo engine shortly (due next 2-3 months I believe) that will probably replace the 1.4 100PS engine

 

basic 4 speed auto boxes are pretty old hat now, most are 6-7 speed to help ecomony

Sat in one the other day too... just a bit 'meh' to be honest. Just felt like my Mk 2 but with the dash re-designed in the corporate style.

All the ones I've seen have all been on Dunlop Sport Maxx tyres too, which I don't understand.  It's not like the average buyer on a poverty spec mk3 is going to be doing anything "sporty" to warrant a "sports" tyre? Looks even more ridiculous with the huge arch gap they insist on which looks nothing like their "sporty" advertising shots. 

Or what I think is really happening is that they are getting these tyres on the cheap and fitting them to anything and everything. 

Dunlop make a version of the Sport Maxx specifically for VW I believe;

 

VW version

 

http://www.camskill.co.uk/m54b0s103p113505/Dunlop_Tyres_Car_Dunlop_SportMaxx_SP_Dunlop_Sport_Maxx_-_215_40_R17_87V_XL_%28VW1%29_MFS_TL_Fuel_Eff_%3A_C_Wet_Grip%3A_C_NoiseClass%3A_1_Noise%3A_68dB

 

Standard version

 

http://www.camskill.co.uk/m54b0s103p105982/Dunlop_Tyres_Car_Dunlop_SportMaxx_SP_Dunlop_Sport_Maxx_-_215_40_R17_87V_XL_TL_Fuel_Eff_%3A_C_Wet_Grip%3A_C_NoiseClass%3A_1_Noise%3A_68dB

 

 

No idea if there is a real difference other than the Maximum Flange Shield but most on-line retailers advertise the two types, hence why I suppose we are stuck with it as factory fit :S

 

 

TP

Mine came with Bridgestone Potenzas fitted, never had Bridgestone tyres so not knowing what to expect, didn't really fancy the Contis again after last time, they felt too soft and wore quite quickly.

 

What are the Sport Maxx like?

Dunlop make a version of the Sport Maxx specifically for VW I believe;

 

VW version

 

http://www.camskill.co.uk/m54b0s103p113505/Dunlop_Tyres_Car_Dunlop_SportMaxx_SP_Dunlop_Sport_Maxx_-_215_40_R17_87V_XL_(VW1)_MFS_TL_Fuel_Eff_%3A_C_Wet_Grip%3A_C_NoiseClass%3A_1_Noise%3A_68dB

 

Standard version

 

http://www.camskill.co.uk/m54b0s103p105982/Dunlop_Tyres_Car_Dunlop_SportMaxx_SP_Dunlop_Sport_Maxx_-_215_40_R17_87V_XL_TL_Fuel_Eff_%3A_C_Wet_Grip%3A_C_NoiseClass%3A_1_Noise%3A_68dB

 

 

No idea if there is a real difference other than the Maximum Flange Shield but most on-line retailers advertise the two types, hence why I suppose we are stuck with it as factory fit :S

 

 

TP

Well, eventually they will wear out and then its Michelin time.

 

salesman said VRs is coming due to demand an will be a 1.4 TDi 160 - 180PS, just can't help but think mk2 reliability issue de ja vue

 

TSI surely? Can't see them squeezing that much power out of a three cylinder TDI.

Mine came with Bridgestone Potenzas fitted, never had Bridgestone tyres so not knowing what to expect, didn't really fancy the Contis again after last time, they felt too soft and wore quite quickly.

 

What are the Sport Maxx like?

 

well, on my vRS (factory fitted tyres) I find them very good, but they need to be warmed up to work at their best. I've always found their wet grip very good too.

Other's have different opinions on them saying they are not so good though. Having said that, when I eventually wear mine out I will be buying Michelin Pilot Sport 3's instead.

 

bluecar1, on 07 Mar 2015 - 21:00, said:

 

salesman said VRs is coming due to demand an will be a 1.4 TDi 160 - 180PS, just can't help but think mk2 reliability issue de ja vue

 

Well, eventually they will wear out and then its Michelin time.

 

 

salesman was definite a diesel,

 

could it be a 2.0TDi 150PS? nice as plenty of scope for tuning

 

bearing in mind the original MK1 was a 1.9TDi 130PS

•  

 

 

salesman was definite a diesel,

could it be a 2.0TDi 150PS? nice as plenty of scope for tuning

bearing in mind the original MK1 was a 1.9TDi 130PS

</p>

My local dealer is adamant there is now a vRS in the pipeline too. Reckons will be diesel and manual.

big question now is

 

"what is the price" !!!!!!

 

with skoda UK's crazy pricing policy (put a stupid RRP so plenty of room for discount) I can't see it being much less than £17k-£18k

My local dealer is adamant there is now a vRS in the pipeline too. Reckons will be diesel and manual.

Judging by the anti diesel lobby and pending Euro 6/7 emmisions laws, I doubt Skoda will put a larger capacity Diesel engine into a small family hatchback, it will have to have good handling to compete with the Fiesta ST and Pug 207 GTI so putting a heavy derv engine upfront won't help.

Judging by the anti diesel lobby and pending Euro 6/7 emmisions laws, I doubt Skoda will put a larger capacity Diesel engine into a small family hatchback, it will have to have good handling to compete with the Fiesta ST and Pug 207 GTI so putting a heavy derv engine upfront won't help.

the Octavia VRs sells more diesels I believe, the fabia mk1 VRs was diesel only, the fabia mk2 was petrol with lots of problems reported

 

so some would see it as logical to return to a winning formula of an oil burner in the VRs

but a diesel VRS should work/make sense.

Since presumably no VRS will be bought to merely  pootle about urban areas.

Which pootling is the root cause of DPF issues.

just a thought.. same 1.4TDI 105PS, but with twin turbo perhaps?

the only 150PS diesel in the VAG line up is the 2.0ltr so if 150PS and diesel are the power and fuel of choice for the new VRs then the 2.0ltr unit is the likely choice